PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘select committee’ Category

Fairness @ Work under National?

Posted by Sue Moroney on November 4th, 2009

Thank goodness I don’t have a fragile ego (if I have one at all). In the past two weeks, the Nats have block-voted against hearing submissions on a petition I championed signed by nearly 16,000 other New Zealanders and they have also introduced a Bill reducing the right for all NZ workers to have a meal break – undoing legislation passed under Labour, based on a members’ bill I drafted.

But this posting is not about my ego, because that’s not the reason I’m am MP (can’t speak for others). I’m not taking it personally. After all “its not about me.”

It is about the thousands of school support staff, social workers and other ordinary fair-minded New Zealanders who the National Government took deliberate action against by block-voting to ensure they didn’t have to justify the axing of pay equity investigations for these hard-working New Zealanders.

And it is about workers who’s health and safety will be put at risk if National goes ahead with its plans to give employers the specific right to require workers to attend to their duties during their meal breaks and rest periods.

It is highly unusual for a select committee to refuse to hear submissions on a petition – particularly one of that size. However, the Nats were prepared to sacrifice the democratic principles of select committee procedures so that they weren’t put in the embarrassing position of having to defend the indefensible.

The Minister of Labour has already admitted that the Pay and Employment Equity Unit was closed down by her against the advice of her Department of Labour officials. Maybe the Nats blocked the hearing of submissions on the petition because they were worried about what the DOL would say in its submission?

Whatever the reason, David Bennett, Jackie Blue, Tau Henare, Allan Peachey and Michael Woodhouse should hang their heads in shame as the MPs who voted to block submissions being heard.

I bet none of them admit to having prevented the petition from being heard the next time the turn up at their local schools for a visit.

As for the right to a meal break at work, I don’t know about you but when I’m flying, I wanna know that the person in the sole-charge regional control tower is well-rested, alert, hydrated and has reasonable blood-sugar levels when they are giving important information to the pilot of my plane.

The Nats though, are passing legislation to ensure that they have to work through meal and rest breaks and in the process are subjecting all other NZ workers to the same possibility.

Not the brighter future they promised really, is it?

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Pay Equity, Uncategorized, democracy, education, human rights, labour, legislation, national, select committee
10 Comments

15809 voices silenced

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 30th, 2009

Today, the report of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee on the petition of Sue Moroney and 15808 others was published.  The petition, tabled just a month ago, requested that the House of Representatives “call on the National Government to reverse its decision to scrap pay equity investigations for school support staff and social workers, implement the findings of previously completed pay and employment equity reviews, and develop a strategy to eliminate the gender pay gap in New Zealand.”

The majority of the committee (ie National members) say they “have no matters to bring to the attention of the House”.

How can the government possibly know this without bothering to hear from any of the petitioners?

Labour members on the Committee say in the report that the 15,808 petitioners should have been given the opportunity for the matters raised in the petition to be examined by the select committee in more detail. At the very least the select committee should have heard from Sue Moroney and the Government departments involved before deciding not to call for public submissions.

As a member of the Transport & Industrial Relations Committee, I was perturbed by the cavalier way in which National responded to this petition.  They don’t agree with it – we know that – but I would have thought that such a large petition would be considered for more than a nano-second by this government.

Tags:
Filed under: Pay Equity, parliament, select committee
7 Comments

Finlayson on mealbreaks

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 28th, 2009

Wilkinson wasn’t in the House today so Finlayson answered. I don’t know what the Chief Justice saw in him. He is [deleted after careful consideration - Clare]

He totally misrepresented the current legislation. Failed to mention that the air traffic excuse for this shocking bill was solved using the amendments passed under Labour last year.

Here is what he said, and what it means I think is that it is the intention of the government to force the bill through before Christmas with no Select Committee:

11. Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour-Hutt South) to the Minister of Labour: What has happened since compulsory rest and meal breaks for employees came into effect this year, which has led to her proposing changes to that legislation?

Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Acting Minister of Labour): From complaints received by the Minister it has become clear, if it was not already, that not everyone has a cup of tea at 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. and stops for lunch precisely at 1 p.m., except possibly Parliament when it is in urgency and, on most occasions, the courts. The changes are aimed at ensuring flexibility in the workplace by allowing employers and employees to time their breaks in a way that does not disrupt their work. The Government does not believe it should restrict the rights of employees to ask their employer if they can skip afternoon tea and go home a little earlier than usual in order to pick up their children from sports practice.

(more…)

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: consultation, democracy, labour, national, parliament, poverty, select committee, union
19 Comments

ACC figures nonsense

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 10th, 2009

When Nick Smith told a pack of lies around the appointment of John Judge as ACC Board chair, including to the Select Committee I sat on, the Labour Party focussed on Smith because Judge had a good reputation for commercial nous and had done a good job as Te Papa Board chair.

His statements yesterday are a real worry. 

He is working on the false assumption that money for all the future payments for past injuries has to be collected this (or last) year. That is just nonsense.

Our government took a decision to collect a bit more each year to shift the scheme from one that was “pay as you go” to one where the future costs of this years accidents were collected this year and a bit of the future costs of previous years accidents was also collected.

Levy levels depend on how many years are taken to do the catch up. To characterise it as a scheme at risk of falling over reflects badly on Mr Judge.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Budget, finance, national, privatisation, public services, select committee
23 Comments

Repeal provocation defence now

Posted by Lianne Dalziel on September 15th, 2009

I noticed the media coverage of the submission made by the NZ Law Society on the Provocation Repeal Bill, and was a bit concerned that they seemed to be taking the debate backwards instead of forwards.

The Society seems to be saying that the defence of provocation needs to stay until there is more work done on what would take its place. They recall that the Law Commission Report recommended that the Sentencing Council implement sentencing guidelines to satisfy those that felt that judges could not exercise the discretion they now have not to impose a life sentence for murder. That is true, but it wasn’t a pre-condition of their recommendation to repeal the partial defence at all; and besides which this government has said no to the Sentencing Council.

The Society goes on to say that the law should distinguish between degrees of murder but that is entirely contrary to the Law Commission’s report, which said that this would allow juries to essentially dress up their prejudices as law.

The Law Society said that “if the partial defence were to be abolished, juries might convict on the alternative charge of manslaughter based on their sympathy for the defendant rather than on rational grounds” – how else can anyone describe the use of the current defence?

All of these issues were put to bed in the Law Commission’s report and there is no need to put the brakes on reform. So let’s not muddy the debate. We have a great opportunity to get rid of this anachronistic relic and we should get on with it.

Tags:
Filed under: justice, select committee
6 Comments

Does Telecom care more about its land than its workers?

Posted by Clare Curran on September 11th, 2009

I got asked the other day by a senior practitioner in the communications industry (that’s PR) what I thought about the quality of management amongst New Zealand corporates.

I had to think about it, because, while I think there’s definitely a much higher awareness that good management = a happier workforce = a stronger bottom line and solid relationship with the community, many companies still don’t get it.

There’s a glaring example happening right now, where one of our biggest companies and most recognisable brands, Telecom, is engaged in a disgraceful attempt to cut its core labour force and turn what’s left into dependent contractors who have no choice about where they get their work, how much they can earn, and yet they have to buy their own vans, gear and take all the risk. While at the same time taking a pay cut. A pretty big one.

And today, 200 of them are being made redundant. For no apparent good reason. Basically to cut costs.

Apart from the workers, who will be affected? All of us. Because there’s less skilled workers to fix your phone faults and make sure you’re connected to a landline and to the internet. These are people who know their work, know the system. And they’re either being left on the scrap heap or being undermined and devalued.

Good management? I don’t think so.

And get this. Telecom appeared before a parliamentary select committee yesterday in Wellington arguing against a bill that aims to ensure land taken by the Crown for public works, and no longer needed for the purpose it was taken for, is offered back to Maori first. Telecom said they supported the principle behind the Bill, but that it could have “unforseen consequences”.

The NZ Herald article reported that:

The proposed amendments could result in Telecom being forced to offer back sites that form part of our network and that would be prohibitively expensive, or impossible to replace.

If this occurred we maybe unable to deliver telecommunications service to the areas served by those exchanges and sites.”

I’ve heard reports that there are hundreds, possibly thousands, of phone/internet faults in Northland and Auckland that aren’t being fixed because of the current strife being caused through Telecom’s current public relations nightmare.

Telecom could start thinking about its management culture. And its priorities. It’s not rocket science. The strength of any organisation, any business, lies in the people. Treat them well and your organisation will flourish. And we’ll all benefit.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Skills, business, comms & IT, parliament, redundancy, select committee, workforce
73 Comments

The Lorax stirs

Posted by Phil Twyford on September 7th, 2009

This Government has taken an axe to so many things…metaphorically speaking: Kiwisaver, night classes, the R & D tax credit. Ahh, the list goes on.

But it is now taking an axe – more literally – to our urban forest with the banning of tree protection rules. The ban is found in cl 52 of the Resource Management Amendment Bill due for its second reading this week, and well covered on the front page of this morning’s Herald.

By prohibiting tree protection rules that say you cannot cut down any tree over a certain size without getting a consent, the only option will be for Councils to list individual trees they want to protect. As many submitters to the select committee pointed out, this would be so expensive as to be impractical. It’s not going to happen.  Auckland’s leafy burbs will have more chainsaw noise than a Mooloo game. See David Shearer’s post for more on this.

For National this is a trophy in their crusade against red tape. But it is pure ideology. Environment Minister Nick Smith rejected Jeanette Fitzsimons’ compromise solution that would have made tree protection rules less onerous by allowing pruning without a consent and making consents easier and quicker to obtain.

Meanwhile the Lorax is stirring. Emails demanding cl 52 be dropped have been flooding the in-boxes of Auckland MPs. Conservation groups have mobilised. Two hundred people attended an angry public meeting in Grey Lynn last week and another one is planned out west.

Where are National’s Auckland MPs on this? Labour and Green MPs fronted the Grey Lynn meeting but no sign of Nikki Kaye or any other National MP.

While she wasn’t at the public meeting, Nikki Kaye has projected a lot of empathy on this issue over recent months around central Auckland where there is intense concern over the fate of our urban coastal forest. But on this issue, as with the cuts to night classes and the Government’s unpopular super city, Ms Kaye talks a good line in empathy and concern in the electorate but votes the other way in Wellington.

In the local Ponsonby News Ms Kaye had this to say:

I understand the value of trees in an urban environment. Unfortunately, like John Elliott I have some concerns about the potential impact of the tree provisions within the RMA. Over the next few weeks I will be working with the Party and people like John Elliott to see what I can do to allay those concerns either through legislation or policy.

I challenge Nikki Kaye to oppose cl 52 in the House this week. Most of her Auckland Central constituents don’t want our trees to be put at risk. Empathy is a fine thing but it is how you vote in the House that really counts. She should support the amendment Labour and the Greens will be putting up to delete cl 52, or explain to her constituents why she is not supporting it.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, conservation, local government, select committee
46 Comments

Gov’t loses in select committee

Posted by Trevor Mallard on August 29th, 2009

A key part of Anne Tolley’s Education Amendment Bill was defeated at select committee this week.

Her policy  to allow corporate takeover of the school board function either as a commissioner or limited statuory manager and allow one school board to take over another was rejected by Labour Greens and Act.

An unusual alliance driven by a variety of reasoning. One common point was the need to have an individual to hold to account when schools are under temporary governance.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: education, national, parliament, privatisation, public services, select committee
6 Comments

All ‘wee-weed up’

Posted by Raymond Huo on August 28th, 2009

Instantly, the title of this Bill tells you its not going to be a straightforward one:

Taxation (International Taxation, Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill

What a mouthful.

This Bill is so complex that it has got almost everyone involved all ‘wee-weed up’.

The phrase ‘wee-weed up’ was coined by the extremely gifted orator Barack Obama recently to describe people who get all nervous for no reason.

This Bill has left me all ‘wee-weed up’ – but for good reason.

As the Hon David Cunliffe pointed out during his speech on Thursday - at 824 pages, this is a huge bill. Add to the fact that a vast number of Supplementary Order Papers didn’t even get sent to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and this bill is positively perplexing.

The size and breadth of this bill, combined with a tight report-back date, put considerable pressure on the deliberation process.

Bearing in mind that Labour first introduced this well intentioned bill, which is now in danger of being blighted through a rushed process, and it’s fair to say that I’m now officially ‘wee-weed up’.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Tax, Uncategorized, select committee
5 Comments

ETS shambles… Maori, Dunne under pressure?

Posted by Trevor Mallard on August 28th, 2009

The ETS select committee is due to report back. I haven’t spoken to members of the committee but putting things together from points of order in the house yesterday:

  1. The select committee deliberated and resolved to report back thursday last week.
  2. As part of their deliberation the committee agreed to wait for 5pm that day for the Maori party’s minority points for the commentary.
  3. The Maori party submitted their comments.
  4. At that point Peter Dunne had an obligation to include the comments and table the report.
  5. Key met with the Maori party leadership. The pressure went on and the Maori party tried to withdraw their comments and change their position.
  6. They have been advised they can’t. Because the deliberation was complete and can’t be reopened.
  7. Dunne hasn’t tabled the report,

It is simply a disgrace. Frankly I thought both Dunne and Sharples had more integrity.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: M?ori, environment, national, select committee
38 Comments

Speaker changes mind on Banking Inquiry rooms

Posted by David Cunliffe on August 7th, 2009

Yesterday we announced that the Speaker, Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith, had changed his mind on whether or not to allocate Parliamentary space for the multi-party banking inquiry.

We had initially requested the use of Select Committee rooms, as these were well set up with tele-conferencing facilities and were an appropriate size and format. He declined that request because he didn’t want to give the impression it was a Select Committee inquiry, he said, and further argued that a multi-party inquiry was not, in his view, part of the business of Parliament.

Jim Anderton, Russel Norman and I took this up with him in discussion. We provided him with past precedents from when the Committee rooms had been used on many occasions by everyone from lobbyists to Parliamentary friendship groups to multi-party announcements to who knows what, including private social functions. We argued based on recent Business Committee decisions, that legitimate Parliamentary business is broader than just the meetings of the House in full session or its Committees.

MPs are rightly accountable to the public for their work around the country in their electorates and on issues of public policy and importance, whether it is inside the Chamber or out. There is no doubt that the issue of bank interest rates is of significance when up to a billion dollars is at stake and it raises important questions about monetary policy and supervision of the system.

We are pleased that on reflection Speaker Smith has changed his mind and now allocated some excellent space on the second floor of the Beehive, which will be ideal for our purpose

Thank you Dr Smith. Your decision has saved a more extended debate on the constitutionality of Parliamentary business at this time.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: bank, finance, parliament, select committee
4 Comments

Asian community is banking on an inquiry from National

Posted by Raymond Huo on July 31st, 2009

Over the past weeks, a familiar mood has cropped up when I have been out talking to members of the ethnic community on the street, at events and in shops.The mood is one of anger and outrage at the reluctance of the National-led Government to support an inquiry into banking profits and its failure to stand up on behalf of all hard working New Zealand families.

Many people I have spoken to believe they are paying higher interest rates than they should be paying. It seems to me the best way to work out whether hard working New Zealanders and businesses are getting a fair deal is to hold an inquiry into the relationship between the Official Cash Rate and short term interest rates. This way all the facts will be put on the table and people can see whether they are being treated fairly by their banks.

The mood has generated huge media attention in the Asian communities.

As a result, the Auckland-based World TV, which broadcasts 10 channels in Chinese, Japanese and Korean, sent its crew to the electoral office of the Leader of the Opposition, Hon Phill Goff, and invited Labour finance spokesperson, Hon David Cunliffe, to specifically talk to the Asian communities on this issue.

I had the pleasure of appearing alongside Hon Phill Goff and David Cunliffe.

Asians are passionate about numbers, so I reiterate a startling statistic which was mentioned in the interview on World TV:

Over the past year the Reserve Bank has cut the OCR by 575 basis points, but business lending rates have only fallen by 243 points, and the floating first mortgage rate has fallen by 446 points.

The Labour Party, Greens and the Progressives announced on July 27 their intention to hold the equivalent of a parliamentary select committee inquiry into bank profits.

As a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee, I witnessed how hard the Labour team – led by Hon David Cunliffe – fought in vain to convince the Government to hold such an inquiry.

The feedback from Asian communities has been over-whelming in favour of such a move. Mr Sam Lee of Pakuranga rang me expressing his approval and support of Labour’s move. ”All we ask is an inquiry. What is National worried about? All we want is a fair deal,” said Mr Sam Lee.

If you would like any more information visit the bank inquiry website: http://www.bankinquiry.org.nz

Tags: ,
Filed under: asian, finance, national, select committee
15 Comments

Nats fold on education questions

Posted by Trevor Mallard on July 29th, 2009

I posted a teaser on 4 July.

Now the Education and Science Committee has met, reported to the house and confirmed minutes.

The Committee on a 5 – 4 vote led by Jo Goodhew decided not to forward questions relating to the budget’s effect on regional and rural polytechnics and on universities and Ministry of Education advice on expenditure reductions. The Chair, Alan Peachy ruled the questions in order and relevant but then voted against sending it to the Minister  for answer.

This approach was within standing orders but unprecedented. The estimates process is a key part of the opposition information collection system.  Labour and Green members were outraged.

To help convince the government to return to the approach of previous govenments over the last twenty years I tabled over 1,000 questions and sent the minister over 100 OIAs.

I was therefore not surprised when last week the National members of the committee folded, relented and allowed the questions to go from the committee to the Minister.

Goodhew see a bit of humble pie being sampled.

Tags:
Filed under: education, select committee
3 Comments

Questions To Members Today

Posted by Trevor Mallard on July 21st, 2009

Teaser continues:-

Questions to Members

Hon MARYAN STREET to the Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the Estimates for 2009/10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the Budget’s funding of universities on the Committee’s agenda for its next meeting?

MOANA MACKEY to the Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the Estimates for 2009/10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the Budget’s impact on regional and rural polytechnics on the Committee’s agenda for its next meeting?

CARMEL SEPULONI to the Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the Estimates for 2009/10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education or Tertiary Education Commission provided relating to the supplying of Cabinet papers on the youth guarantee scheme on the Committee’s agenda for its next meting?

KELVIN DAVIS to the Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Is the question of considering whether to forward a supplementary question on the Estimates for 2009/10 relating to advice the Ministry of Education has provided on each of the expenditure reductions within Vote Education on the Committee’s agenda for its next meeting?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Filed under: Budget, education, select committee
11 Comments

Curious timing

Posted by Clare Curran on July 15th, 2009

Interesting decision by Commerce Minister Simon Power late yesterday to reinstate Telecommunications Commissioner Dr Ross Patterson. The right decision. Interesting because it’s now mid July and Dr Patterson, who is much respected in the telecommunications industry, fulfilled the conditions of his medical leave some months ago. January springs to mind. Why has it taken so long for the Minister to get round to reinstate him?

Word has it that he wasn’t going to be reinstated. Particularly since the guard changed within the Commerce Commission. Then there were a series of questions asked (by me) of Simon Power at the Commerce Select Committee estimates hearing some weeks ago probing on why he had not been reinstated. My interest came purely from the concern I was hearing in the sector about the need for a permanent telecommunications commissioner and the importance of one as experienced as Dr Patterson. I have never met him, so I have no personal interest.

So…  A few unanswered questions. I’m curious to know why it took so long for the Minister to make this decision. What was the reason for the delay? Was it political? I think the Minister made the right decision, but he’s made it several months later than he should which indicates there were other issues and pressures operating behind the scenes. What were they?

It seems that the Minister only decided to move after he was put under pressure in the Commerce Select Committee and via media reports on the issue. Not a good look.

Tags: ,
Filed under: comms & IT, national, select committee
3 Comments

Value Local Government workers

Posted by Carol Beaumont on July 13th, 2009

I was pleased to hear from both the Devonport Community Board and the North Shore City Council in their submissions to the Auckland Governance Legislation Subcommittee that they recognise the importance of the local government workforce in this process.

The quality of service delivery is dependent on the actions of local government staff and this was acknowledged by the Devonport Community Board.

North Shore City made very strong statements in relation to the transfer and treatment of local government staff which make real sense. They said:

“We believe that the transfer of staff from existing territorial local authorities to the Auckland Council and Watercare Services Limited should happen contemporaneously rather than staged over time,  in order that the movement of staff happens in a co-ordinated way:

  • Council staff are entitled to a degree of certainty and security in their employment relationship in a period of significant change
  • The committee should reinstate the provisions in respect of the transfer of remaining employees from the existing territorial local authorities, which was removed from the draft Bill (clause 36) when the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau) Act was enacted.”

The treatment of local government workers through this reform process is fundamentally important. Imagine the double insecurity many of these workers are currently feeling with both the current recession and ever increasing numbers of unemployed people and  the significant changes in Auckland’s governance.  Not made any easier by the comments (speedily retracted) of Auckland Mayor John Banks that 40% of the 6800 local government workers will be redundant. Like all workers, those in local government deserve fair treatment.  The ratepayers of Auckland also deserve fair treatment - changes to Auckland’s Local Governance arrangements should not result in worse but better services to Aucklanders.  These services need to be provided by committed and experienced local government workers who recognise that they are public servants.

Experience in Australia has shown the negative consequences to ratepayers of not providing security and fair treatment to local government workers during the restructuring of local government – the loss of commitment, skills and the subsequent reductions in services. 

The treatment of local government workers through the changes to Auckland governance is something we all need to be concerned about!

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, jobs, labour, local government, select committee
1 Comment

Banks out of step

Posted by Phil Twyford on July 13th, 2009

Auckland City mayor and super-mayoral aspirant John Banks showed this morning at the super city select committee he was out of step with much of public opinion on key democratic aspects of the bill. Mayor Banks has been perhaps the most high profile but is now an increasingly isolated cheer leader for the Government’s super city model.

He supported the Government’s proposal that a minimum of 8 councillors in the new Auckland Council be elected at large, arguing that when he was a councillor representing Birkenhead on the regional council early in his career he was utterly focused on getting re-elected, and looking after the votes in his local ward.

We are only about one-third of the way through the hearings but I have to say that argument has been pretty well debunked in my view over the past week. MPs and councillors commonly rise above the parochial concerns of their electorates. And if the new super city clearly separates out the regional and local tasks of the Auckland Council and local councils this should not be a problem.

It is also clear from submissions that people fear at-large counncillors would be less accountable. And more likely to come from the eastern suburbs, as was the case before the ward system was introduced to Auckland City in 1989.

Mayor Banks’ submission was also revealing on the question of the powers of local boards. He proposed the new super city council would delegate powers to the local councils, and be given the flexibility to shape the roles of super-council and local councils over time.

This was out of step with many other submissions to date which asked that the powers of local boards would be clearly mandated in legislation and not left up to the discretion of the Auckland Council.

Banks’ own Council has starved its community boards of powers and budget. They are a good case study of why the powers of local councils should be set out in law and not left up to the discretion of the super-council.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, select committee
14 Comments

Time to be a good corporate citizen

Posted by Lianne Dalziel on July 12th, 2009

I have written to ING on behalf of the people who have written to me about the settlement offer which has as its deadline tomorrow despite the fact that the Commerce Commission investigation under the Fair Trading Act into the two funds (DYF & RIF) is a long way from concluding.

I had expected that the government would intervene in this matter as part of their consideration of moratoria however I was advised late last week that this was not going to happen. ANZ has ensured that the release, which people have signed in accepting the ING offer, does not extend to any complaints lodged against them by the end of July with the Banking Ombudsmen. I believe ING should do the same with respect to matters before the Commerce Commission.

If the Commerce Commission investigations show that there has been wrongdoing on the part of ING or any other party covered by the release, then those that sign up to the current offer should not be precluded from benefitting from the results of any prosecution or settlement that might follow such a finding. I believe ING should adjust the terms of the release accordingly. The reason for writing to ING is that I don’t believe ING should be able to essentially get away with its statutory obligations simply through the timing of their offer.

I have advised them that I am fully prepared to develop a private members’ bill in order to ensure that these rights are not taken away from such individuals, and given that many MPs have been receiving similar heart-wrenching letters to the ones I have received, I am sure it would get a fair hearing in Parliament. However I actually don’t want to go down this track because I think it should come from ING and I hope that they step up to the plate tomorrow.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: parliament, select committee
No Comments

U-turn on local councils…it’s almost official

Posted by Phil Twyford on July 12th, 2009

The Government is doing a U-ey on the proposed second tier of local councils in the new Auckland super city.  It is not quite official yet, but from the way Government members on the  select committee have been talking this week it’s basically a done deal.

It is just the latest step in the slow unravelling of the Government’s deeply flawed super city plan.

Back in April Rodney Hide threw out the Royal Commission’s plan for empowered local councils, and announced a plan for local boards that have been widely derided as toothless talkshops ever since.  Or ‘tea and scone clubs‘ as Judith Collins called them.

Hide’s local boards which are set out in the bill currently before the select committee, would be primarily about community engagement (aka talkshop), with the power to make operational policies on a limited range of issues like dog control, liquor licensing and grafitti. Such powerless local boards would effectively mean an almost complete centralisation of power in the super-Auckland Council, stripping communities of their voice in the process, and potentially allowing local issues to distract the super Council from the big regional tasks like water, transport and planning.

The idea has taken a hammering: from royal commissioners Justice Peter Salmon and David Shand who both spoke out publicly against them, the mayors, Local Government NZ, Labour and the Greens, and an array of community groups and individuals.   After a week of submissions at the select committee I am hard pressed to recall a single submitter who argued in favor of Rodney Hide’s talkshops.

So its Round 1 to Aucklanders. A back down from the Government. Next stop the at-large councillors, an idea which also took a bit of a hammering during the first week of select committee hearings. Then there is Maori representation.

Underlying the whole debate is the fear so many Aucklanders have about the potential for privatisation of community assets under the Super City. The government has labeled these legitimate public concerns as ‘scaremongering’ but the time has now come for the government to ‘ante up’ and say where it stands on protecting Auckland’s community assets in public hands.  For more on this, see Labour’s Not Yours To Sell campaign.

Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, select committee
10 Comments

Teaser

Posted by Trevor Mallard on July 4th, 2009

Weird things happened at Education & Science Committee this week. Unprecedented Tory abuse of process. To say what happened would breach privilege and I won’t do that. But I’m working to remedy and expose.

Tags: ,
Filed under: democracy, education, parliament, select committee
31 Comments

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »